Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

The Mail v Chris Moyles

I wouldn't say I'm Chris Moyles's biggest fan. But perhaps that gives me a better perspective to look at this story (warning: links to the Mail) than someone who does hold him in high regard. Because no matter how otiose, annoying or irritating I might find Moyles, I don't think anyone deserves to have a private moment like the break-up of a relationship intruded into by some lumbering twat with a massive camera.

Holding her close to his chest, it seems like a loving gesture.

But after eight years together, this was Chris Moyles' heart-wrenching final goodbye to girlfriend Sophie Waite.

The pair met up when Waite handed back the keys of the Radio 1 DJ's Audi last week, after he ended their apparently rock-solid relationship.

Stay classy, Daily Mail. You stay nice and classy, eh. Still, at least they haven't decided to go in with some meaningless, pointless and prurient speculation about the reasons for the relationship breaking up. Oh, wait:

‘Both Sophie and Chris are devastated,’ a source revealed. ‘But Chris just felt he was not ready for marriage and Sophie most definitely was.

‘She wants children and a family. She wanted to settle down properly with Chris – and he had kept her dangling for some years.

‘She had spent so much time and love on Chris, she adores him and to say she is heartbroken is the understatement of the year.

'She is in pieces. None of their friends can really understand it, they seemed so happy together.’

Two ways of looking at that 'source' really. They might be someone who actually knows the parties involved; they may just be a convenient way of jemmying even more intrusion via idle baseless speculation into the story. But here's the thing: if the 'source' really does exist, and we are to believe that the couple are 'heartbroken', 'in pieces' and 'devastated', probably the last thing they'd want is (a) their mates gobbing off to the press about the details of their breakup and (b) some bastard with a giant lens looming over them and snapping away while they're going through the last rites, then a newspaper not only publishing it but allowing horrible, speculative and snippy comments underneath the online version of the story. Comments like "she has let herself go", "she's not ageing very well", "she's a bit too big for those tight jeans" and, perhaps most loathsome of all, "She would have just stolen a large chunk of your wealth in the future and maybe deliberately stopped you seeing your kids".

As I've hinted, to say I've not got a lot of time for Moyles is putting it mildly, but bloody hell - he and his partner are human beings, aren't they? I'm pretty sure that being a radio presenter doesn't mean you should be forced to have your relationship pored over by bastards on the internet - does it? And I'm pretty sure that being a celebrity, or the partner of a celebrity, doesn't mean that either. But then to think that is to think too highly of people like the Mail.

No related posts.